Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: 5.5 foot-pounds is just as good as 16 foot- pounds

  1. #1
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    Default 5.5 foot-pounds is just as good as 16 foot- pounds

    I was watching some AEAC videos on YouTube and discovered something interesting about pellet penetration versus springer power. It seems that, in 4.5mm, at around 30 metres, certain combinations of common pellet types shot from a 5.5 foot-pounds spring air rifle can penetrate the same distance into a gel target as ones shot from a 16 foot-pounds air rifle also in 4.5 mm.
    I found this to be very interesting as someone who likes to eliminate back yard gel targets; though, it seems to me that the 16 foot-pounds air rifle will clearly deliver a more forceful shock effect on the target allowing for a faster knockout blow. Nevertheless the 5.5 foot-pounds gun will make the same length of hole through the subject. The guns reviewed are the HW 30s and the Diana N-Tec 340.
    The links to the videos are
    Diana N-Tec https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8ptWO3qupI&t=602s
    HW30s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HpzkdXCLu8&t=350s
    Sign Up To Air Rifle SA Forums

  2. #2
    Springer FT World Champion '09
    Protea FT Team '19

    SAFTAA FT Colours '12
    Forum Sponsor

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Interesting, but I would take the 5.5 HW over the Dina every day, because I will be able to hit what I aim at.
    Sign Up To Air Rifle SA Forums

  3. #3
    Sharp Shooter
    The Professor

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sisuphos View Post
    it seems to me that the 16 foot-pounds air rifle will clearly deliver a more forceful shock effect on the target allowing for a faster knockout blow. Nevertheless the 5.5 foot-pounds gun will make the same length of hole through the subject.
    Not necessarily. The 4.5 mm at higher velocities will often drill right through certain types of target and does not transfer much energy to them, whereas the same pellet launched at lower velocity will stop within the target i.e. it has transferred all of its energy to the target.

    In certain application the latter is far more preferable to the former.

    As always though, shot placement is the key a low energy strike in the right place is far more effective than a high energy drill through in the wrong place.
    Sign Up To Air Rifle SA Forums

  4. #4
    Springer FT World Champion '09
    Protea FT Team '19

    SAFTAA FT Colours '12
    Forum Sponsor

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dale View Post
    Not necessarily. The 4.5 mm at higher velocities will often drill right through certain types of target and does not transfer much energy to them, whereas the same pellet launched at lower velocity will stop within the target i.e. it has transferred all of its energy to the target.

    In certain application the latter is far more preferable to the former.

    As always though, shot placement is the key a low energy strike in the right place is far more effective than a high energy drill through in the wrong place.

    Dale.... please clear this up for me.

    I don't believe that pellets deliver any real 'shock' to a 'target', hence the importance of shot placement.

    HIGH VELOCITY = shock effect, IMO, and anyone that talks of 'knock-down power' from a pellet gun is deluded and has been brainwashed by a box-dropping sales twat. Tagets expire from leakage (Like a broadhead arrow makes them do) and not from having their entire insides turned to jelly.



    Those same people also buy those crazy-shaped super pointy, explosive expansion, inaccurate lumps of kak believing the hype. It is all logically contradictory, as you need high velocity to make the crazy pellets work like a .338 Lapua, but as soon as they exceed 'required' velocity, they can't hit shit.
    Low velocity then also negates the need for said pellets.

    Why Dale.... WHYYYYYYYYYY?
    Last edited by Bludlust; 23-07-19 at 09:05.
    Sign Up To Air Rifle SA Forums

  5. #5
    Sharp Shooter
    Forum Sponsor

    User Info Menu

    Default

    I concur with what Dale said.

    Accuracy, no matter velocity is paramount.

    If the pellet is placed with precision the target will expire.

    In my experience( at short range) a pellet that stops within a target causes instantaneous expiration.

    A pass through on the other hand, may result in the target traveling a short distance before expiring.

    For short range work a low powered 177 is more than adequate, and in my opinion preferable to a 12 foot pound(or more) one.

    I also agree with Bludlust, at air rifle velocities shockwave damage is a mute point.

    Expanding, fragmenting and exploding pellets or whatever else these wonder pieces of lead are marketed at is nothing but bull... imo.
    Last edited by Pellet pusher; 23-07-19 at 09:46.
    Sign Up To Air Rifle SA Forums

  6. #6
    Sharp Shooter
    The Professor

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bludlust View Post
    I don't believe that pellets deliver any real 'shock' to a 'target', hence the importance of shot placement.

    Targets expire from leakage (Like a broadhead arrow makes them do) and not from having their entire insides turned to jelly.
    Bearing in mind this is skirting into an area considered no-go to discuss on this forum, I will give my interpretation as best as possible.

    'Shock' I would guess depends on how you define that.

    With the relatively low powered airgun the objective is to make the pellet strike a vital area and the pellet causes unsustainable damage to that area. Your concept of 'leakage' would not apply to any ethical use of an airgun in this context.

    With certain vital areas a through and through will cause sufficient damage in its passage to effect the required outcome, in other areas it will not.

    Where a pellet remains within the target you know that all its energy has been transferred to the target which will cause a certain amount of collateral damage, now bearing in mind such targets are relatively small the degree of damage caused is likely to be relatively large.

    The other benefit of opting for a power level that minimises over-penetration is where there may be items beyond the intended target that you don't want to cause damage to e.g. roofing material.
    Sign Up To Air Rifle SA Forums

  7. #7
    Sharp Shooter
    The Professor

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bludlust View Post
    HIGH VELOCITY = shock effect, IMO, and anyone that talks of 'knock-down power' from a pellet gun is deluded and has been brainwashed by a box-dropping sales twat.
    Those same people also buy those crazy-shaped super pointy, explosive expansion, inaccurate lumps of kak believing the hype. It is all logically contradictory, as you need high velocity to make the crazy pellets work like a .338 Lapua, but as soon as they exceed 'required' velocity, they can't hit shit.
    Remember what I have said in the past about the human/vegetable hybrids - well someone has to make money out of their ignorance.................
    Sign Up To Air Rifle SA Forums

  8. #8
    Springer FT World Champion '09
    Protea FT Team '19

    SAFTAA FT Colours '12
    Forum Sponsor

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dale View Post
    Bearing in mind this is skirting into an area considered no-go to discuss on this forum, I will give my interpretation as best as possible.

    'Shock' I would guess depends on how you define that.

    With the relatively low powered airgun the objective is to make the pellet strike a vital area and the pellet causes unsustainable damage to that area. Your concept of 'leakage' would not apply to any ethical use of an airgun in this context.

    With certain vital areas a through and through will cause sufficient damage in its passage to effect the required outcome, in other areas it will not.

    Where a pellet remains within the target you know that all its energy has been transferred to the target which will cause a certain amount of collateral damage, now bearing in mind such targets are relatively small the degree of damage caused is likely to be relatively large.

    The other benefit of opting for a power level that minimises over-penetration is where there may be items beyond the intended target that you don't want to cause damage to e.g. roofing material.

    I suppose there would be a certain amount of deflection and tumbling inside the cavity with a lower velocity projectile - on impact, so that would increase the effectiveness.

    I just get irked when the Hybrids (I LOVE THIS TERM!) talk about 'knock-down power' as a desirable feature of an airgun purchase.


    Thanks oh Wise One!
    Sign Up To Air Rifle SA Forums


Similar Threads

  1. Field Target Foot Pounds
    By Bakersman in forum SAFTAA | Field Target forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 18-03-13, 12:11
  2. Help please Joules / foot pounds
    By Yeti in forum Airgun Discussions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 31-01-10, 09:41
  3. Predator pellet in my foot!!!
    By Spyker in forum Airgun Discussions
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 19-10-09, 17:44
  4. airgun foot-pounds and velocity calculator
    By boondock in forum Airgun Discussions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-03-05, 13:03

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Friends of Air Rifle SA